Marsh v. Ne-ha-sa-ne Park Ass'n
New York Supreme Court
Actioet of ejectment to recover the northeast quarter of. Township. 38, Totten & Crossfield’s ..purchase, Hamilton county, except 1,000 acres. The plaintiffs claimed title under the original patent to Alexander Macomb. The defendant claimed title under the tax sale of 1843, the comptroller’s deed based thereon to the people of the state of New York, the title so acquired by the state having passed by ■mesne conveyances to the defendant.
Read the full summary
Actioet of ejectment to recover the northeast quarter of. Township. 38, Totten & Crossfield’s ..purchase, Hamilton county, except 1,000 acres. The plaintiffs claimed title under the original patent to Alexander Macomb. The defendant claimed title under the tax sale of 1843, the comptroller’s deed based thereon to the people of the state of New York, the title so acquired by the state having passed by ■mesne conveyances to the defendant. The tax sale-of 1843 was made.for unpaid taxes, of 1836, 1837, 1838 and 1839,' in each of which years the whole of 'Township 38 so far as it was in Hamilton…
1Opinion of the CourtKellogg, J.
The plaintiffs have shown a paper title to an undivided five-sixths (5-6) of the lands described in the complaint if the objections made to the plaintiffs’ proof are not well taken. The evidence discloses:
First. A patent from the state to Alexander Macomb, dated February 28, 1787.
•Second. A deed from Alexander Macomb to William Edgar, dated July 5, 1791.
Third. A deed from William Edgar to James Barrow, dated June 30, 1821.
Fourth. The will of James Barrow in New York county, December 4, 1862.
Fifth. Deeds from the" devisees of James Barrow (owners of 5-6) of all their right, title and interest…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Crary v. . GoodmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Joslyn v. . RockwellNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- Thompson v. . BurhansNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Williams v. SheldonNew York Supreme Court · 1833
- Zink v. . McManusNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Saranac Land & Timber Co. v. RobertsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908
- Ranchers Exploration and Development Co. v. Anaconda Co.District Court, D. Utah · 1965
- City of Oneida v. DrakeNew York Supreme Court · 1928
- Board of County Commissioners v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Colorado · 1921